tv For the Record With Greta MSNBC May 23, 2017 3:00pm-4:01pm PDT
five-year lobbying ban for people who decided to work in the administration and then leave, i've got some fine washington, d.c., swampland to sell you. that's all for now. "for the record with greta" starts right now. >> thanks, chuck. welcome back. >> thank you. the threat level in the uk has been raised to the highest level. critical critical level meaning british officials are worried an attack could be imminent. this is one day after the bombing in manchester. theresa may taking to national tv and making this announcement just moments ago. >> it has now been concluded, on the basis of today's investigations, that the threat level should be increased for the time being from severe to critical. this means that their assessment is not only that an attack remains highly likely but that a further attack may be imminent.
>> this grim news breaking about the worry of another attack as we get other breaking news that the brother of the suspected suicide bomber has been taken into custody. both men, british citizens. and dimming the lights of the eiffel tower. matt, the fact that the prime minister gets on the tv with this announcement that the threat level has been raised to critical and it could be imminent must have everybody on edge tonight in london. >> reporter: well, yeah. here in man cchester, everybody has been on age for the past 24 hours and one of the reasons that it was said that another attack could be imminent and one of the reasons that they believe that is the sophistication of this weapon that went into this
attack, this heinous attack that happened jusbehind me at the arena inmanchester. we've seen these sorts of attacks, these sorts of lone wolf attacks throughout europe. britain has been spared, for the most part, except for five months ago when the westminster attack happened when a man drove his car into several pedestrians on a bridge outside of parliament. if you remember, the threat level didn't change then. but with a bomb, a bomb that a lot of experts say couldn't have been made by one man alone, there had to have been helpers and co-conspirators and that means that there are necessarily other terrorists that are at large. we don't know any of this for sure but this is the speculation that a lot of security experts are putting on theresa may saying why she rose the threat level. this is the first time the threat level has been raised in a decade.
the third time it's been raised since these scaled threat levels have been imposed on british security system. theresa may also made mention that she was going to be deploying armed soldiers onto the streets of london to join police officers in protecting citizenry. this wouldn't seem so strange in america. it wouldn't even seem that strange to see the sight of fatigued armored troops walking the streets of paris. here in britain, that's indeed a very strange and jarring sight. british police are famously unarmed and the sight of famous streets with long guns, that's going to be a major change for a lot of people and it's going to bring the threat of terrorism into a more manifested and obvious way that so many people in london have been used to worrying about but not actually seeing straight in front of them. now, this manhunt for further suspects continues. but here in manchester, they are
really trying to mourn. we saw a vigil outside of the town hall down the street from where i am. it's really a very sad occasion because, as you mentioned, greta, most of the victims here were children. greta? >> matt, thank you. with me, a former fbi agent who worked on numerous terror cases after the attack on the "uss cole" and author of "anatomy of terror." nice to see you, sir. >> nice to see you. >> obviously it's terrifying, even across the pond from the uk to here to hear the prime minister say that the threat has been raised to critical and uses a word like "imminent". >> absolutely. that indicates that the result of the investigation so far tells us something of a bigger
network. so it wasn't only a lone wolf. there are probably people who helped him. maybe people who helped him in the casing or carrying out the operation. another thing that was important in the media is that he came from london carrying with him supposedly the bomb. if that happens, that means maybe there's part of the cell in london. if the bomb is made of an explosive vest or suicide vest, that's a level of sophistication that cannot be carried out by only one person. an individual cannot build an explosive vest by reading "inspire" magazine or following up instructions put out by isis on individual yes on how to make a bomb in your mother's kitchen. so definitely it seems to me, at least, that the results of the investigation so far indicate a wider network, indicate other individuals who might still be in the uk who were involved in
assisting and helping salman abedi to carry out this terrorist attack. and until they identify all of these individuals, until they catch that bomb maker, for example, if they are looking for a bomb maker, or the other individuals who might be preparing to do a second wave of attack, we are going to start -- we're going to continue to see the critical threat in the uk, unfortunately. >> there are reports that mi-5 was aware of this person prior to the news breaking about this time last night, 24 hours ago, that they were aware of him. i don't know what really means. but the u.s. officials did not who he was. i suspect that raising this threat level to critical, you take the fact that they knew something about him and perhaps sophistication of the bomb that he had to have had help and they picked up his brother today for unknown reasons and the investigation ongoing is that for some reason it strikes me --
i don't see the prime minister trying to calm everybody down, as is to typical of leaders. rather, she has now alerted everybody that there could be something else coming. >> i think she's doing the right thing. because if the investigators are telling her, we believe there's a bigger network, a wider network out there, if the investigators are telling her that that individual did not do it alone, then she has to protect, you know, her people and she has to be honest with them. that possibly there are a cell that's still operating. now, i am not surprised in any way that security services in the uk know about that individual, that they -- that he is on some radar. as you know, greta, from all of the so-called lone wolf attacks in europe and even in the united states, people who carried out the attack are known by
intelligence services. the problem is when you have thousands and thousands of people that you're monitoring and you have to dedicate resources and pick which individuals you're going to continue to monitor 24/7. unfortunately, we have to be successful 100% of the times. they have to be successful only once. >> thank you, ali. >> thank you. the former head of the cia saying we now have evidence that trump campaign officials were contacted by russians. john brennan saying that out loud and in public for the first time. >> that evidence exists of collusion, coordination, conspiracy between the trump campaign and russian state actors at the time you learned of 2016 efforts? >> i encountered and am aware of information and intelligence that revealed contacts and interactions between russian
officials and u.s. persons involved in the trump campaign that i was concerned about because of known russian efforts of such individuals and raised questions in my mind, again, whether or not the russians were able to gain the cooperation of those individuals. i don't know whether or not such collusion -- and that's your term -- such collusion existed. i don't know. but i know that there was a sufficient basis of information and intelligence that required further investigation by the bureau to determine whether or not u.s. persons were actively inspiring, colluding with russian officials. >> brennan saying that the russia russians brazenly interfered. he still had questions, even as president trump was sworn in. >> i was worried by a number of
the contacts that the russians had with u.s. persons and so, therefore, by the time i left office on january 20th, i had unresolved questions, in my mind, as to whether or not the russians had been successful in getting u.s. persons involved in the campaign or not to work on their behalf. again, either in a witting or unwitting fashion. >> brennan described how russian spies attempted to gather material for blackmail. >> i know what the russians try to do. they try to subborn individuals and get u.s. persons to act on their behalf, either wittingly or unwittingly. frequently individuals who go along a treason path don't realize they are along that path until it gets to be a bit too late. >> director of intelligence dan coats testified in front of the armed services panel and agreed that russia brazenly interfered
with the election. trump asked coats to push back on the russia probe. everyone wanted to know if he would confirm that today. >> it's not appropriate for me to comment on any of that in public. so on that as well as other topics, i don't feel it's appropriate to discuss the conversations with the president. >> but he's willing to talk in closed hearings or to the special counsel robert mueller. the plot thickens. michael s michael schmidt and michael isikoff are joining me. >> look, i think it was significant just to have john
brennan say it publicly on the record. he's essentially confirming what my colleagues here have previously reported but to have that level of public confirmation and particularly -- look at the language he used. contacts and -- between people in the campaign and the russians. here we are, brennan was talking about intelligence he had from last summer. here we are eight, nine months later and we still cannot say with any certainty who exactly he's talking about, who was talking to who. we've had multiple reports. we know of at least one person. there's been a foreign intelligence warrant on. i mean, that shows how slowly, in some respects, this is moving even though this has been such a hysteria in washington about it.
well deserved, by the way. >> robert mueller taking over james comey, that investigation, a criminal one, he says there's some investigation, is that might be moving at a faster pace but maybe more secret. michael schmidt, what did you learn today? >> well, the thing that struck me is that if you're trump, you can see why you're still frustrated with this story, because as you point out, they still can't say, here's the collusion. this is the way that we -- brennan can't sit there and say, i did see evidence of collusion. so here we are, several months after he's come into office, all of these accusations have been thrown at them but there's still nothing hard. all he says is there's contacts. it's clear that the russians did try and get as close as they could to this campaign, but still there's -- was there information that was passed, was there intelligence that was passed? was there anything? we still don't have that. >> devin, you wrote a story last week saying that the russia probe has -- i don't know if
this is the right word -- a person of interest or a person close to the president. tell me what that is. >> well, what it means is that a senior white house official is under investigation as part of the russia probe. i use the term person of interest. it's basically a term of art. the point is that tre's a person under investigation currtly working in the white house and in a high-up job, which is what we've been told. we're still working on reporting it out and bringing more information on that. but i think, you know, what you saw today, part of what i thought was interesting about what brennan said today, particular mention of witting and unwitting people who may have been helping the russians. i think that's a key point because that's part of the uncertainty for some period of time which is, to what degree did the americans talking to the russians understand that they might be being played? and i think that's one of the big unanswered questions in all of this. >> and basically whether or not somebody was duped and doing
something but was duped into it. michael isikoff, let me play a sound bite. when you interviewed for yahoo for mr. flynn last summer. let's play it. >> were you paid for that amount? >> you'd have to ask the folks that went over there to -- >> well, i'm asking you. you would know if you were paid. >> yeah. i went over there. it was a speaking event. >> and -- what difference does that make? >> donald trump has made a lot of the fact that hillary clinton has taken money from wall street and -- >> i didn't take any money from russia, if that's what you're asking me. >> well, then who paid you? >> my speaker's bureau. ask them. >> has that been subpoenaed by the fbi? >> it's there for everybody to see. >> we should explain first that people have speaker's bureaus and them they pay that and they take their piece and pass the
money, typically. >> yeah, that's usually the way it works. and there isn't any question in anybody's mind when they give a speech before an audience and a speaker's bureau that pays them where the money is coming from. it's the audience that's paying the speaker's bureau and especially giv that michael flynn was an ielligence officer, that he would think that there's some sort of fiction about where the money comes from. >> that was last july, right? >> what's significant about what has happened just in the last -- this week, is that the house committee, congressman with an investigation that was done of flynn trying to get a security clearance renewed earlier in the year, february 2016, and he uses this same fig leaf, saying i was only paid by u.s. companies. the speaker's bureau is a u.s. company.
that is so clearly -- it's transparent where the money was coming from. the money was coming from rt, a russian government television station and that is what could well get him in trouble legally. >> michael schmidt, there was testimony today that last august, brennan told his counterpart for the russians that basically we're on to you, you're messing with our election, and denied it. but he said he would take it to putin. as far back -- this is before podesta even -- before his e-mails were leaked by wikileaks. this is back i august. is there any information as to why we didn't take bigger steps then? >> that's a question that really hasn't gotten enough attention. this is why the obama administration waited as long as they did to act.
it's only after the election that the president orders this intelligence report that really fleshes it out tloult t. comey wanted to write an op-ed, the white house pushed back on that. we still don't understand why. we think that they were afraid that if they used this, they said, look, there's a real issue here, a national security issue that trump would accuse them of putting their finger on the scale for hillary and using national security as a way of doing that. >> devin, tonight the senate intelligence committee says everything is on the table that they may subpoena more from general flynn, maybe seek contempt. they are keeping the door wide open. they obviously know if they do any form of immunity, they could step on the fbi's investigation. where do you see -- is that just to serve an empty threat from the senate intelligence committee? >> i don't think it's an empty threat but i would be surprised if the senate work actually gets
out ahead of the criminal investigation. i mean, i just think that everyone sort of understands the stakes at this point and i would be surprised if anything that goes on on the hill genuinely interferes with the fbi's work and the special counsel's work. i think they're going to find a way to, you know, deconflict that -- those two separate tracks. but look, the issue of congressional subpoenas is a very real one for those folks and it's not a light thing. but at the end of the day, my expectation is that everything is going to take a back seat to the fbi and special counsel investigation. >> and i think by the most gripping testimony, it's going to be fbi -- former fbi director james comey who is going to meet with mueller to see how far he can go in testifying. dan coats today would not say whether or not the president had put pressure on him because he thought it was inappropriate to be talking about the president's conversations but comey is no longer fbi director, so he may
talk. >> yeah. although, i think there is a question about whether mueller will want him to testify at this point. it points to a potential obstruction issue that mueller has to investigate. telling that story in public would not be helpful to the investigation. >> good point. gentlemen, thank you. still ahead, the timeline of president trump's allege contact and new subpoenas to general michael flynn and a big warning about possible contempt. plus, democrats debating the "i" word, impeachment. are some democrats going too far? we'll hear firsthand from the democratic leadership. i count on my dell small business advisor
for tech advice. with one phone call, i get products that suit my needs and i get back to business. ♪ ♪ when a fire destroyed the living room. we were able to replace everything in it. liberty did what? liberty mutual paid to replace all of our property that was damaged. and we didn't have to touch our savings. yeah, our insurance won't do that. well, there goes my boat. you can leave worry behind when liberty stands with you™. liberty stands with you™ liberty mutual insurance
oscar mawe went back toig the drawing board... and the cutting board. we removed the added nitrates and nitrites, by-products, and artificial preservatives in all of our meat. every. single. one. why? for the love of hot dogs. abreak through your allergies.? try new flonase sensimist allergy relief instead of allergy pills. it's more complete allergy relief in a gentle experience you'll barely feel. using unique mistpro technology, new flonase sensimist delivers a gentle mist to help block six key inflammatory substances that cause your symptoms. most allergy pills only block one. and six is greater than one. new flonase sensimist changes everything.
to document production. >> we issued two subpoenas to the flynn businesses that we're aware of. it's even more clear that a business does not have a right to take a fifth if it's a corporation. >> making new demands after general flynn refused to hand over documents. the committee now questioning flynn's lawyer about the decision to snub the subpoena and now they are issuing subpoenas to his businesses. this comes as a senior intelligence official tells nbc news that trump asked to push back against the russia probe. over the last few months, we've seen a slew of reports attributed to anonymous officials about the president's allege contacts with intelligence leaders. "the new york times" reporting that on january 27th, trump asked james comey for loyalty. the president has denied he's made this request. "the times" reporting that he
asked flynn to end the question. the president has denied that account. >> did you at any time urge director james comey in any way, shape or form to back down the investigation into michael flynn and, also, as you look back -- >> no. no. next question? >> "the waingt post" reporter that in mid-february, the white house asked intel figures and leaders of the committees to push back on reports of contacts between the trump campaign and russians. the white house confirmed to "the washington post" that it communicated with those officials but the white house said the communications were not i improper and on march 20th, this happened. >> the fbi, as part of our counterintelligence mission, is investigating the russian government's efforts to interfere in the 2016 presidential election. and that includes investigating the nature of any links between individuals associated with the
trump campaign and the russian government and whether there was any coordination between the campaign and russia's efforts. >> now, "the washington post" reporting and nbc confirming that days later president trump asked the director of national intelligence to publicly deny evidence of collusion with russia. a few days later, the president made a similar request to the nsa director. in a sporngs tresponse, the whi said it would neither confirm or deny unsubstantiated claims from anonymous people. with me now is jonathan and michael and bob. bob, first to you. is that subpoena enforceful from the senate? >> they need to get someone to enforce it for them, generally from the u.s. attorney's office. i don't understand the argument that you can't subpoena documents. >> because it becomes testimony
mo the way that they've asked for it. >> and so are documents. produce a document memo to self, i did it. of course you don't have to produce that. i don't really understand exactly what the argument by the senate is. >> well, we'll get to that. i'm sure they will battle that one out. now, if the president had gone to -- and i say "if," because this isn't evidence yet. it may be some day, it may not. is that improper? if he told him to push back on the investigations. >> yeah, it's improper. >> what do you do about it? >> well, the problem, you know, people keep talking about obstruction of justice and that's a very hard crime to prove. it's not like, you know, a stabbing where you've got the victim, the knife and so on. but it builds cumulatively and i can't help think that that's why mr. trump is being advised to hire private counsel because he keeps adding to this question
of, is he doing something to interfere with the investigation? >> michael crawly, what's your thought today about the testimony on capitol hill, the timeline i've laid out and even the whole controversy over the flynn subpoena? >> well, greta, the tide keeps rising. i think that, you know, the water overtakes each position that the white house stakes out and they have to retreat a little fartr. i think -- i agree. what we're seeing is cumulative. the story, the charges become more and more credible. collusion is far from proven in this case, but hearing that out of john brennan's house that he was concerned about the possibility of collusion adds to the credibility of this charge, adds to our concern and then i think the revelation that donald trump is calling these intelligence officials, you know, it may not be illegal. it's certainly seems very improper and on some level
stupid. but at a minimum, improper. and to suggest that trump just doesn't open boundaries and what else has he been doing and are there other phone calls or meetings that he's been having that would cross a line into illegality? and i would add one more thing, greta. "the washington post" story also reported that white house officials had contacted intelligence officials asking them to persuade comey to drop his investigation into flynn. if that's true, that sounds pretty clearly like obstruction of justice. so again, the tide is rising here. it's not good news for the white house. >> you know, bob, i'm anxious to see what comey's document says. apparently he made contemporaneous notes during his meeting with the president. would you expect coats and rogers likely to have done the same or expected them to go to the general counsel at the two different agencies and say, look, this happened? >> i think both of those.
that is, i suspect that certainly admiral rogers would have gone back and done a memo to the file or something and i also suspect he would have spoken with his general counsel, which would be a normal thing to do. it's such an unusual communication have with the president, with the white house. >> are there private conversations between the president and the head of the nsa, the cia or the dni? i mean, aren't they all asis stands and aides around and advisers? >> in general, i know mike hayden had conversations all the time but i don't think it was ever with president bush by himself. >> michael, so the testimony from comey, i think, is going to be very important. but do you think mueller is going to shut him down? do you think mueller is going to tell him not to testify? >> well, i think that's a good guess. i don't see that there's a bunch
of benefit for having comey testify. mueller, generally, is not a guy who think the spotlight is helpful to the investigations. he was not known for interactions with the press. i'm not inside of his head but it would be consistent with who mueller is to say less visibility is probably the safer course of action. what's the benefit, number one. and then number two, when you're running an investigation, you don't need commentary and public spectacle that you can't control. and, of course, mueller and comey are close. and so comey will, i'm sure, listen to what mueller says not only because of mueller's position but because of their long-standing good relationship. >> i don't think mueller would tell him not to. mueller might advise h not to and say it's your decision but it might hurt the investigation, which is tantamount to both.
hte, that was it. now i have nicoderm cq. the nicoderm cq patch with unique extended release technology helps prevent your urge to smoke all day. it's the best thing that ever happened to me. every great why needs a great how. dearthere's no other way to say this. it's over. i've found a permanent escape from monotony. together, we are perfectly balanced, our senses awake, our hearts racing as one. i know this is sudden, but they say: if you love something... set it free. see you around, giulia ♪ p3 planters nuts, jerky and whaseeds.at? i like a variety in my protein. totally, that's why i have this uh trail mix. wow minty. p3 snacks. the more interesting way to get your protein.
and it's also a story mail aabout people and while we make more e-commerce deliveries to homes than anyone else in the country, we never forget... that your business is our business the united states postal service. priority: you when heartburn hits fight back fast with new tums chewy bites. fast relief in every bite. crunchy outside. chewy inside. tum tum tum tum new tums chewy bites.
this is dangerously flirting with obstruction of justice. >> democrats on offense in the russia probe. some using the phrase "obstruction of justice" but is there a political risk of overreaching? the editorial board of "the new york times" writing, "for democrats, too much of indulgence of impeachment actions could be a distraction" and john podesta saying this. >> i see no sign that there's any likelihood that he'll be impeached. i think the republican leadership has decided, you know, we're in the boat with him and the boat is going to sink and we're going to sink with him but we can't really throw him out of the boat. >> with me, co-chair of the
communications policy. good evening. >> good evening, greta. >> well, where do you stand on this investigation? because a lot of the democrats are very aggressive in what they're saying. you've heard some use the word "impeachment" but it's a fact that once you get outside of washington, the president has a huge volume of people who support him and who voted for him. so wherere you on this? >> our guiding star has to be to what is right, first of all. i represent the northwestern part of the state of illinois. it's a district that donald trump won. and i won by 20 points. so that means that for basically 1 out of every 5 voters voted for donald trump. when i go home and do a supermarket trip and walk the aisles, people are not
mentioning the "i" word. they want to make sure that we get to the bottom of this and that's what i'm pushing for. >> we have political noise going on here in washington. a lot going on back and forth on each side. do you think that the president interfered with an investigation? >> you know, i gave a speech on the house floor where i used the old phrase that -- i'm a former journalist, greta, so you know this. but it's where there's smoke, there's typically fire. and that smoke is billowing out of the white house. there are a lot of signs that there's a problem here. and that's why we called -- we're calling for an independent investigation into this, the 9/11-style commission, so we can figure out what happened and make sure that it doesn't happen again. we're very pleased with the fact that we now have a special prosecutor lking into this. a guy who has the utmost integrity. the american public just wants
to get to the bottom of this. and i think the thing that is not talked about as much as it should be, but with all of these diversions coming out of the midnight tweets and what seems to be bad behavior is that we're not focusing on what people in middle america, like i represent, want to focus on. and we need to get a highway bill passed. candidate trump talked about a trillion dollar infrastructure package. well, now president trump, you know, let's focus on that instead of all these other things. >> i think he'd be happy to do that. he probably hates the investigation more than you might hate it. congresswoman man, thank you for joining us. i hope you come back. >> thank you, greta. still ahead, if the russia probe stretches on for months or even years, will republican leaders stand by the president? i'll tell you what they are saying today. my day starts well before
i'm even in the kitchen. i need my blood sugar to stay in control. so i asked about tresiba®. ♪ tresiba® ready ♪ tresiba® is a once-daily, long-acting insulin th lasts even longer than 24 hours. i need to shave my a1c. ♪ tresiba® ready ♪ tresiba® works like my body's insulin. releases slow and steady. providing powerful a1c reduction. i'm always on call. an insulin that fits my schedule is key.
♪ tresiba® ready ♪ i can take tresiba® any time of day. so if i miss or delay a dose, i take it when i remember, as long as there's at least 8 hours between doses. once in use, it lasts 8 weeks with or without refrigeration, twice as long as the lantus® pen. (announcer) tresiba® is used to control high blood sugar in adults with diabetes. don't use tresiba® to treat diabetic ketoacidosis, during episodes of low blood sugar, or if you are allergic to any of its ingredients. don't share needles or insulin pens. don't reuse needles. the most common side effect is low blood sugar, which may cause dizziness, sweating, confusion, and headache. check your blood sugar. low blood sugar can be serious and may be life-threatening. injection site reactions may occur. tell your prescriber about all medicines you take and all your medical conditions. taking tzds with insulins like tresiba® may cause serious side effects like heart failure. your insulin dose shouldn't be changed without asking your prescriber. get medical help right away if you have trouble breathing, fast heartbeat, extreme drowsiness, swelling of your face, tongue, or throat, dizziness or confusion. ask your health care provider if you're tresiba® ready. covered by most insurance
and medicare plans. ♪ tresiba® ready ♪ and it's also a story mail aabout people and while we make more e-commerce deliveries to homes than anyone else in the country, we never forget... that your business is our business the united states postal service. priority: you but when we brought our daughter home, that was it. now i have nicoderm cq. the nicoderm cq patch with unique extended release technology helps prevent your urge to smoke all day. it's the best thing that ever happened to me. every great why needs a great how. "let life in with new herbal essences bursting with argan oil of morocco and notes of jasmine to put more life in your head. and now with the power of bio:renew to put more life in your hair. try new herbal essences
and let life in" if you had trouble keeping up with the news today, do not worry, we have you covered. three major hearings on capitol hill with former and current intelligence officials. two of them testifying at the same time before two different committees and it's all happening while the president is traveling overseas and responding this morning to the terror attack in manchester. here's how it played out in 60 seconds. >> i will call them losers, because that's what they are. they are losers. >> and back in d.c., the director of national
intelligence asked about reports that the president urged him to push back on the fbi probe. >> i don't feel it's appropriate to characterize conversations with the president. >> do off legyou have a legal pe to do that? >> a president is not supposed to influence an fbi investigation. >> this is dangerously flirting with obstruction of justice. >> at the same time, the former cia chief testifies about possible ties between russia and the trump campaign. i was worried by a number of the contacts that the russians had with u.s. persons. >> i saw information and intelligence that was worthy of investigation by the bureau. >> and midday -- >> president trump, you can see, is arriving in rome. we're on the third leg of his first foreign trip. >> mike rogers also testifies before congress. >> with me, chief national correspondent for "the boston globe," heidi, senior legal
correspondent for "usa today" and clarence. first to you, as we look back at the day, dan coats says he's not talking about what the president said or didn't say. he's mum. >> he's mum for now. by the way, this is supposed to be a quiet time of year, isn't it? it was an amazing day here. but, yeah, he's not saying much right now but he had earlier indicated that there had been some pushback by the white house against the investigation of flynn and this tended to back up what comey had said earlier. and so we've got one more brick in the wall of controversy around the president's possible attempts to obstruct justice. >> all right. today, cia director brennan, heidi, was talking about the fact that he warne the russians last august.
he warned them to get out of tla their election. >> i'm struck by how much the intelligence committee knew last summer amid the election. of course, that's not their place to inform the public. >> what is their job, then? if they didn't protect us, i mean, if that was their job and they didn't do that, if they're not telling us, okay, that's another thing, if they're not telling then president obama -- >> i guess that's the question of the protocol because they did inform all of the congressional leadership who also knew in the summer, which explains why when comey came out with the statements on hillary clinton's e-mails, harry reid fired off the saucy letter. each time one of these guys testifies, i'm struck by how much information we had, enough, like you said, to warn to back off and it's not just that
russia was meddling. it was that he suspected that there could be and they needed to investigate possible collusion. >> to what extent -- i imagine the white house would say about brennan, he's a democrat and an obama appointee and he was out after the 25th and if he had all of these suspicions, why didn't he do more, i suspect will be the response. >> it's so frustrated. he can only tell just this one part of the story, which, you know, clearly they're seeing something more than suspicion of russian interference if they go so far as to launch an investigation. so it is like you're only seeing the grand jury testimony but not the defense attorney's case. i mean, he has seen it up to a point. but also, i think it's stunning that this group of people knew so much and, you know, layer on top of that, discussion about hillary clinton's e-mail server.
and to keep complete silence that this other massive thing was going on, it is a little bit -- it does take it back -- >> comey wanted to do an op-ed, remember? and he was vetoed. >> clarence, from your neck of the woods, the chicago area, what are the people saying? do you think this is a serious investigation or do they think that the presidemedia is pickine president? >> i'm old enough to remember watergate well and folks who went into it not liking nixon still didn't like him but folks who did like him supported him almost write up to the time that he quit. this happened with trump. his support is still solid, including illinois and the rest of the upper midwest. meanwhile, outside of his core supporters, though, he's losing tremendously. >> it's fascinating to me because i look at my e-mails, not that it's a scientific study, but you're right, people who are trump supporters are
sticking by them. at least the ones who liked him. the ones who never liked him in the beginning are going after him fierce. >> dick durbin said last week, look, i've been around this place long enough to know that republicans are looking at the same numbers that i'm looking at, which explains a lot, 80% still support among his base. once you start to see those cracks, the calculation, just like in watergate, can be very quick and cold blooded. all right. we're going to take a quick break. in the face of unspeakable hate come the stories of the heroes in manchester. i've been working on this therapy for 5 years now and we're getting ready to go to the clinic. my son definitely keeps me fighting. i want to be there for him when he needs me. that's what motivates me. i want to see patients have gray hair. i see myself growing old with my pink hair.
that to me, is enough to keep going. hey katy, i'm going to go ahead and invade your personal space to run some things by you. it's going to look like i'm listening but i'm actually just paying attention to nugget. cool. i'll pretend you're answering the questions i have. i'll scroll through my feed and avoid making eye contact. i'm just going to keep hovering. wouldn't it be great if everyone said what they meant? hovering away. boo boo boo [making noise at nugget] the citi® double cash card does. it lets you earn double cash back with 1% when you buy, and 1% as you pay. the citi® double cash card double means double.
about the russian investigation. it's the one subject that the gop lawmakerks not escape on capitol hill. there was a budget released today, but that is not what is making headlines. ba annie, if you live in this town, you think we would know about a budget being released. with the president's traveling, we don't have tax reform or infrastructure bill. health care is, i don't know what the story is. it's passed the house but dead on arrival in the senate. but we're talking about other things. >> it's not a stain on the hill as it was last week. but i mean, it's still there. the questions are still coming at these members of congress about russia. of course, they would prefer to talk about just about anything else. but i've been asking a lot of republicans, are you going to continue this investigation now that there's a special counsel? and i've been very surprised.
they've had a lot of what i would almostal enthuse a. for just wanting to have -- be able to get to the bottom of it from their own branch of government. there's pride in their branch of government, which i think is healthy. >> clarence, why don't the republicans just sort of duck it on capitol hill and say now there's a special prosecutor, we're going to let mueller do that and we're going to do these other things? and they have an out. >> there is a concern that they might not -- they might be prevented from having certain witnesses or evidence because the special prosecutor wants those exclusively. but at the same time, on capitol hill, they have a saying, use it or lose it. the clout on these committees is very valuable. if they don't take action, folks will say, why do we need you for? >> right before i came here, i went to democratic leadership because i wanted to make sure i have my facts straight. the thing that's missing in
these investigations, how do we prevent russia from doing this in 2018, in 2020, specifically in terms of protecting our voting machines, because while they didn't do it here -- >> we need a tech difference. >> they did hack the voting machines in ukraine. >> but is that really -- i mean, that's what we should be looking at. that's an important item, and let the special prosecutor do the other. >> i said who's doing that? they were like, good point. >> thank you. coming up, heroic actions in the face of terror. that's next. in these turbulent times, do you focus on today's headwinds? or plan for tomorrow? at kpmg, we believe success requires both. with our broad range of services and industry expertise, kpmg can help you anticipate tomorrow
and deliver today. kpmg. ♪ ♪ i'm dr. kelsey mcneely and some day you might be calling me an energy farmer. ♪ energy lives here. discover card. hooh, you're real?? you know i'm real! at discover, we're always here to talk. good, 'cause i don't have time for machines. some companies just don't appreciate the power of conversation! you know, i like you! i like you too! at discover, we treat you like you'd treat you. get the it card and talk to a real person. ayou don't have to choose just one thing. choose your trio with any 3 of 9 selections for $15.99.
like new creamy lobster pasta toasted parmesan shrimp and southern-style crab cakes. come create your trio before it ends just like the people every business is different. but every one of those businesses will need legal help as they age and grow. whether it be with customer contracts, agreements to lease a space or protecting your work. legalzoom's network of attorneys can help you, every step of the way. so you can focus on what you do and we'll handle the legal stuff that comes up along the way. legalzoom. legal help is here. dearthere's no other way to say this. it's over. i've found a permanent escape from monotony. together, we are perfectly balanced, our senses awake, our hearts racing as one. i know this is sudden,
but they say: if you love something... set it free. see you around, giulia ♪ abreak through your allergies.? try new flonase sensimist allergy relief instead of allergy pills. it's more complete allergy relief in a gentle mist experience you'll barely feel. using unique mistpro technology, new flonase sensimist delivers a gentle mist to help block six key inflammatory substances that cause your symptoms. most allergy pills only block one. and six is greater than one. new flonase sensimist
i want to say this for the record. last night, at this time, at this very time, the news broke about the vicious terrorist attack in the uk. as the news broke, we didn't know if it was terrorism, but of course we all suspected terrorism. which brings me to this -- how could anyone have so much evil in his heart? it's unthinkable, isn't it? and tonight, no matter how much we wish we could, we cannot console the families of the murdered and the hurt. but i do console myself this way, the reminder that while there may be those with evil in their hearts, there are those who have pure good in their hearts. who are they? first responders.
they're the ones who find it within themselves to rush into an arena of danger to save lives, and they do that to help strangers and not knowing if that arena has been booby trapped that can be debt tated -- detonated. some are sorting through a grisly scene looking for survivors. others have the task of identifying those who died, and still others the task of notifying family who wait and fear and then learn the absolute worse. now, the list of the truly good who do their work for one purpose only, to help, goes on and on and on. doctors, nurses, all of them. just fundamentally good. and oh, how they admire them. by the way, if you know a first responder, this might be a really good time to tell him ore her, we not only need you, but we know what you do for us. thank you for watching. see you back here tomorrow night at 6:00 p.m.
make sure you go to twitter, or check out my facebook page. i put a lot of video from the trip to liberia. so go to my facebook page and see that video. and there's also behind the scenes and so much more posted there. "hardball" starts right now. no roman holiday. let's play "hardball." ♪ good evening. i'm chris matthews. in washington. the former director of the cia testified today that the russians interfered in the 2016 election and set an investigation into whether trump associates colluded with the russians. john brennan told the amount of contact between russian agents and people linked to trump raises questions. >> i encountered and am aware of